Western Kentucky University TopSCHOLAR®

Management Faculty Publications Management

2015 Department Chairs as Leaders: A Model of Social and Creative Performance in a State University Afzal Rahim Western Kentucky Univeristy, [email protected]

Ismail Civelek Western Kentucky Univeristy, [email protected]

Feng Helen Liang Western Kentucky Univeristy, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/manage_fac_pubs Part of the Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons, Management Information Systems Commons, Management Sciences and Quantitative Methods Commons, and the Organizational Behavior and Theory Commons

Recommended Citation Rahim, Afzal; Civelek, Ismail; and Liang, Feng Helen, "Department Chairs as Leaders: A Model of Social Intelligence and Creative Performance in a State University" (2015). Management Faculty Publications. Paper 1. http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/manage_fac_pubs/1

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by TopSCHOLAR®. It has been accepted for inclusion in Management Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of TopSCHOLAR®. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BUSINESS AND THE CREATIVE ECONOMY, 1(1), 52-60, 2015 Issue Copyright 2015 International Center for Studies in Creativity Article Copyright 2015 M. Afzalur Rahim, Ismail Civelek, and Feng Helen Liang I II

I

I

I

I

I

I I

I

I I

I I I ISSN: 2374-1414 print/2374-1422 online I DOI: 10.18536/bcce.2015.07.1.1.07

Department Chairs as Leaders: A Model of Social Intelligence and Creative Performance in a State University M. Afzalur Rahim, Ismail Civelek, and Feng Helen Liang Western Kentucky University

This study presents a structural equations model that represents relationships between depart- ment chairs’ social intelligence (SI) and their creative performance (CP) at a public university in the United States. SI was defined as the ability to be aware of relevant social situations, to manage situational challenges effectively, to understand others’ concerns and feelings, and to build and maintain positive relationships in social settings. Four components of SI were exam- ined: situational awareness, situational response, cognitive , and . The model was tested with questionnaire data from 406 faculty members belonging to 43 departments in a state university. The data analyses with LISREL suggest that department chairs’ SI was positively associated with CP. Implications for management, directions for future research, and limitations of the study are discussed.

Intelligence has been investigated for many years, as Creative Performance evidenced by the steady stream of theoretical and empirical studies published in scholarly journals. Typically the focus is Innovation, which follows creativity, has become a competitive on cognitive ability and IQ is used to measure intelligence. force for organizations for sustaining high performance goals Grade point average, Scholastic Aptitude Test scores, and (Rickards & Moger, 2006). Both management academics and other admission tests are used in academic institutions as practitioners have been working on identifying the factors surrogates of IQ. However, the literature on management that promote CP, which is associated with the generation of shows that cognitive intelligence is inadequate to predict one’s novel and useful ideas regarding procedures, processes, tasks, effective leadership or success. As a result of the inadequacy strategies, products, and services to maintain the competitive of cognitive intelligence in predicting a manager’s success, position of an organization (Stobbeleir, Ashford, & Buyens, other dimensions of intelligence are being discussed. These 2011). Therefore, CP is different from routine performance include , social intelligence or practical measures that involve decision-makers’ day-to-day initiatives intelligence, and cultural intelligence—what scholars refer or routine operations, such as following standard operating to as “street smarts” (cf. Bass, 2002; Van Dyne, Ang, & procedures, resolving employee conflicts, signing documents, Koh, 2009; Gardner, 1999; Sternberg, 2002). The value- and so on. Leaders’ CP has been overlooked in the added contribution of the present study is that it explores management literature, with the exception of a few studies the relationships of social intelligence (SI) components to (e.g. Vincent, Decker, & Mumford, 2002); however, this each other and to creative performance (CP) of academic concept is becoming more important to organizations than department chairs (DCs). This is done by providing a clear ever before due to intense competition in the global market. definition of the SI construct, collecting data with a new SI In the management literature, numerous studies have instrument, and showing to what extent respondents’ SI is shown that there is no significant correlation between associated with their CP at a state university. individual characteristics, such as intelligence (as measured by an IQ test) and creativity. Even though some studies claim Note: This study was supported by Western Kentucky that this is the current status of the intelligence-creativity University Research Award No. 14−8006. Correspondence should be sent to M. Afzalur Rahim, Department of Management, link, one of the most significant trends in the area of Western Kentucky University, 1574 Mallory Court, Bowling organizational creativity is the role of intelligent leadership to Green, KY 42101, email: [email protected]. foster creativity in the workplace (Rickards & Moger, 2006; DEPARTMENT CHAIRS AS LEADERS 53

Byrne, Mumford, Barrett, & Vessey, 2009). Lovelace and SI includes both cognitive and behavioral components in Hunter (2013) performed a laboratory study that suggests its definition. As Sternberg (2009) pointed out, success in that charismatic leaders can enhance subordinates’ creative career is associated with three types of intelligence: creative, performance more than pragmatic and ideological leaders. analytical, and practical. Sternberg’s practical intelligence is Baron (2008), in an extensive literature review, suggested similar to social intelligence. Recent studies have investigated that positive affect influences involving creativity. other related concepts such as intrapersonal (emotional) and In general, individuals experiencing positive affect (joy, interpersonal (social) intelligence (Gardner, 1999), emotional contentment, pride in work) tend to be more creative than intelligence (Goleman, 1998; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, those experiencing neutral or negative affect (sadness, lack 2008), and cultural intelligence (Dyne et al., 2009). of commitment to work, job dissatisfaction) (Isen, 2002). While there is no agreement on the construct of SI, Amabile, Barsade, Muller, and Staw (2005) reported that many scholars agree that SI is associated with one’s ability “affect relates positively to creativity in organizations and to understand the thinking, feelings, and behaviors of other that the relationship is a simple linear one” (p. 367). However, people; to interact with them properly; and to act effectively negative affect can elevate creativity if creative performance in various situations (Ford & Tisak, 1983; Kihlstrom & has a clear relationship to recognition and rewards. In the Cantor, 2000; Sternberg, 2002; Thorndike, 1920). In this literature on creativity, positive emotions produce patterns of study, we build on these definitions and broaden the concept that are linked to creative , effective of SI. For the present study, we have adopted the definition decision-making, and creative performance (Fredrickson, of SI suggested by Rahim (2014) as “the ability to be aware of 2003; Isen, 1993). The present study on SI was focused more relevant social situational contexts; to deal with the contexts on affect than cognition. Department chairs with high SI are or challenges effectively; to understand others’ concerns, expected to create collaborative cultures in their departments feelings, and emotional states; and to speak in a clear and that will generate positive affect leading to creativity. convincing manner that involves knowing what to say, when Barczak, Lassak, and Mulki (2010) concluded that to say it, and how to say it and to build and maintain positive emotional intelligence has a positive influence on trust, relationships with others” (p. 46). This definition consists of which in turn enhances collaborative culture, which increases four categories of abilities—situational awareness, situational team creativity. Castro and Jorge de Sousa (2012) reported response, cognitive empathy, and social skills. This four- that leaders’ emotional intelligence was positively associated category SI nomenclature has been used in the present study. with employees’ creativity, and Rego et al. (2007) suggested The first two abilities, situational awareness and that leaders’ emotional intelligence stimulates creativity in situational response, are necessary for one’s career success their teams. Even though SI is different from emotional and effective leadership. Situational awareness refers to intelligence, there are some overlaps between these two one’s ability to collect information for the diagnosis and constructs. Considering the research discussed in the formulation of problem(s); situational response refers to one’s preceding paragraph, it is hypothesized that SI is positively ability to use this information to make effective decisions associated with the CP of academic leaders. to obtain desired results. The other two abilities, cognitive empathy and social skills, refer to the abilities to understand the feelings and needs of people, to communicate with them Social Intelligence effectively, and to build and maintain relationships. These two abilities can help a leader to remain aware of various There are many definitions of intelligence, but the consensus social situational contexts, thus improving their situational among scholars is that it is an ability to interact with the response competence. Next, we describe theoretical bases of environment effectively to be successful in life or in an the four SI components and interrelationships among them organization. Generally, SI is considered to be a different in detail. concept from academic intelligence. For example, Dewey Situational Awareness. This is defined as one’s (1909) was the first scholar to suggest that the “ultimate competence or ability to comprehend or assess relevant social moral motives and forces are nothing more or less than social situational contexts, and is also known as contextual intelligence—the power of observing and comprehending social intelligence (Bennis & Thomas, 2002). This ability enables situations” (p. 43). Later, in an article published in Harper’s leaders in organizations to collect relevant information and Magazine, Thorndike (1920) proposed three components diagnose situations in a timely manner and to formulate a of SI: abstract (the ability to understand and manage ideas problem correctly. The ability to diagnose a problem is very and symbols), mechanical (the ability to learn, understand, important, and shouldn’t be taken for granted. Contingency and manage things), and social (the ability to manage and theories of leadership usually neglect situational awareness, understand people, and act wisely in human relations). implicitly assuming that leaders understand the relevant 54 RAHIM, CIVELEK, AND LIANG situational variables and are able to formulate their problems To illustrate this point further, consider two processes correctly. But not all leaders possess the capability to make in organizational learning: detection and correction of error an appropriate assessment of situational variables. When the (Argyris & Schon, 1996); that is, the distinct but related leaders formulate a problem wrongly, it could lead to Type III diagnosis and intervention in conflict (Rahim & Bonoma, error, defined as the probability of solving a wrong problem 1979)—the abilities “to diagnose an issue and its causes” when one should solve the right problem (Mitroff, 1998; and also “to decide on the best course of action” (Schmidt Mitroff & Silvers, 2010). Leaders who possess this ability & Tannenbaum, 1960). These two processes—diagnosis or are able to collect necessary information and formulate a detection of error, and intervention or correction of error— problem correctly, thereby avoiding this error. correspond with the two components of SI—assessment of In case the leaders do not have adequate information and responses to situational contexts. on a problem or a potential business opportunity, they are Existing literature on leadership is abundant with likely to engage in internal and/or external environmental prescriptions on how to match leadership styles with scanning. In addition, the leaders may seek help from experts situational variables to improve job performance and to gain an overall understanding of the problem. When satisfaction of followers, but it is relatively lacking in experts have different and even contradictory assessments of identifying the unique situations for which creative responses a problem, it is up to the leader to decide which problem (leadership styles) would be needed to improve outcomes. formulation reflects social reality and is to be accepted. Related to this limitation, leadership theories so far have not Based on Baron and Ensley’s (2006) finding with investigated the need for leaders to possess both situational regard to entrepreneurs’ ability to recognize new business awareness and response competencies to define the situational opportunities, this study suggests that leaders with higher variables and respond to them appropriately. Even if a leader situational awareness ability are better able to recognize can diagnose a situation correctly, he or she may not possess patterns associated with new business opportunities. This the necessary competence to make an effective decision to is supported by existing empirical research. For example, deal with it. O’Brien and O’Hare (2007) find that participants in training Now that it has been illustrated that situational programs with high situational awareness performed well awareness and situational response are two essential abilities irrespective of the training conditions. Albrecht (2007) for effective leadership, the following sections discusses how suggests that situational awareness is one of the five the other two components, cognitive empathy and social components of SI, the other components including presence, skills, can help leaders to improve their effectiveness. authenticity, clarity, and empathy. Albrecht defines situational Cognitive Empathy. Empathy refers to one’s ability awareness as the ability to read situations and comprehend to understand others and take active interest in them, social context influencing behavior, and to choose effective recognizing and responding to changes in their emotional strategies. Mayo and Nohira (2005) suggest that a leader’s states, and understanding their feelings (cf. Goleman, 2005; ability to understand and adapt to different situational Albrecht, 2007; Ang & Goh, 2010). Empathy includes several contexts is associated with leadership effectiveness. components: cognitive, intellectual, affective, and behavioral. Situational Response. This is associated with one’s Specifically, cognitive empathy is associated with one’s ability competence or ability to adapt to or deal with any social to recognize the thinking, feelings, intentions, moods, and impulses situations effectively. Bennis and Thomas (2002) described of people inside and outside the organization. Kaukiainen et al. the situational response, which is essentially the decision- (1999) suggest that “the cognitive component of empathy making competence of leaders, as adaptive capacity. Most forms an essential part of social intelligence” (p. 83). existing research does not distinguish between situational Cognitive empathy should help to improve a leader’s awareness and situational response, and instead rolls them awareness of the feelings and needs of supervisors, into situational awareness (Albrecht, 2007; Mayo & Nohira, subordinates, and coworkers as well as people from outside 2005). This study makes a distinction between the two the organization. This ability to connect with people components. These two components have overlaps, but are should help to improve the appropriate use of social skills conceptually independent. Both are essential for effective competence of leaders. Moreover, cognitive empathy should leadership. It is possible for leaders to recognize or diagnose be positively associated with social skills. a situation or problem correctly, but not be able to make a Social Skills. This component is associated with one’s decision leading to desirable outcomes. In other words, it is ability or competence to speak in a clear and convincing manner possible for a leader to have high or low abilities associated that involves knowing what to say, when to say it, and how to say with these two components. A high-high leader is more it. Social skills also involve building and maintaining positive effective than a high-low, low-high, or low-low leader. relationships, to act properly in human relations, to deal with DEPARTMENT CHAIRS AS LEADERS 55

Figure 1 A Model of Intelligent Leadership and Creative Performance problems without demeaning coworkers, and to negotiate Figure 1, which portrays the hypotheses in this and manage conflict in a tactical and diplomatic way. study, includes solid lines indicating significant (direct) Social skills competence enables a leader to continuously relationships and broken lines indicating nonsignificant collect relevant information from internal and external (indirect) relationships. environments to enhance their situational awareness. Social skills ability helps leaders explain and justify their decisions Method to followers and motivate them so that leaders’ decisions are effectively implemented. Furthermore, entrepreneurs’ social skills competence may play a role in their success (Baron & Sample and Procedure Markham, 2000; Baron & Tang, 2009). The data for the present study were collected from a collegiate The previous section indicates that cognitive empathy sample of 406 faculty at a state university in the United directly effects social skills, and indirectly effects situational States. Average age, teaching experience, and working awareness. In other words, social skills mediates the experience with the present DC in years were 45.10 (SD = relationship between cognitive empathy and situational 3.82), 14.4 (SD = 10.99), and 4.61 (SD = 5.26), respectively. awareness. Also, it is suggested that social skills is positively About 50.5% of the respondents and 35.2% of the DCs related to situational awareness and indirectly related to were female. About 84% of the respondents were white, 5% situational response. In other words, situational awareness black, 4.8% Asian, 3.6% Hispanic, and 3.6% other. About mediates the social skills-situational response relationship. 18.1% of the respondents were professors, 23.8% associate Based on this discussion, the following hypotheses are professors, 24.1% assistant professors, 15.9% lecturers, proposed. 11.2% adjunct professors, and 6.8% part-time. About 55.7% of the respondents had Ph.D. degrees, 38.3% had Master’s Hypothesis 1: Social skills mediates the relationship degrees, and 6% had other qualifications. About 20.2% of the between cognitive empathy and situational respondents were non-tenured. awareness. Measurement

Hypothesis 2: Situational awareness mediates the Social Intelligence. The four components of supervisors’ SI relationship between social skills and situational were measured with 28 items of the Rahim Social Intelligence response. Test (RSIT)—developed and refined by Rahim (2008, 2014). The RSIT was designed to measure subordinates’ perceptions Hypothesis 3: Situational response mediates the of their respective supervisor’s SI. The RSIT was designed on relationship between situational awareness and the basis of repeated feedback from respondents and faculty creative performance. and an iterative process of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of various sets of items in multiple samples. 56 RAHIM, CIVELEK, AND LIANG

Table 1 LISREL Summary Statistics

Measurement Model Statistic 1-Factor 5-Factors Causal Model χ2/df 2.69 1.20 1.44 RMSEA .20 .06 .09 Standardized RMSR .05 .01 .03 Normed Fit Index .91 .98 .96 Comparative Fit Index .94 1.00 .99 Incremental Fit Index .94 1.00 .99 Goodness of Fit Index .88 .96 .94 Note: N = 43.

Considerable attention was devoted to the study of published Validity Assessment (Measurement Model) instruments on SI. The final revision of the instrument was made on the basis of a confirmatory factor analysis of items. Confirmatory factor analysis of the SI and CP items were computed. Results show acceptable fit indices for the two The RSIT uses a 5-point Likert scale (5=Strongly instruments (see Table 1). Agree to 1=Strongly Disagree) for ranking each of the The values for the Root Mean Square Error of items, where a higher score indicates a greater SI of a Approximation (RMSEA) for this sample was .06. Other supervisor. The subscales were created by averaging responses fit indexes, such as Normed Fit Index, Comparative to their respective items. Sample items: “Our DC can Fit Index, Incremental Fit Index, and Goodness of Fit size up a situation he/she finds himself/herself in rather Index are presented in Table 1, and each is ≥ .90, a typical quickly” (situational awareness); “Our DC usually adapts psychometric requirement. These indices indicate that the appropriately to different situations” (situational response); RSIT is a 4-dimensional measure of social intelligence and “Our DC understands people’s feelings transmitted through the criterion measure is a single-dimensional measure of CP. nonverbal messages” (cognitive empathy); and “Our DC Common Method Variance. The one-factor solution interacts appropriately with a variety of people” (social shows that some of the fit indices (RMSEA = .20, skills). Rahim (2008, 2014) provided evidence of internal Standardized RMSR = .05, NFI = .91, CFI = .94, IFI = .94, consistency and indicator reliabilities and convergent and RFI = .88) were unsatisfactory. In other words, the single- discriminant validities of the instrument, and that it was free factor model did not fit the data well and, as a result, the absence of five dimensions or the presence of common from social desirability response bias. method variance in the measures should not be assumed. Creative Job Performance. This was measured with the 2 Convergent Validity. All of the average R exceeded .80, 7 of the 13 items of an instrument developed by George and which is higher than the threshold value of .50, supporting Zhou (2001). A 5-point Likert scale (5=Strongly Agree to convergent validity. Factor loadings were highly significant, 1=Strongly Disagree) was used for ranking each item, where with a minimum z-ratio of 5.56 (p < .001). These results a higher score indicates greater CP of a supervisor. These support the convergent validity of the subscales. seven items relate directly to supervisor’s CP. Sample item Discriminant Validity. There is a strong support for the for this scale is: “Our DC comes up with new and practical discriminant validity between SI and CP. For each pair of ideas to improve our teaching and research.” factors, two models are developed. In one model, the two factors are defined by their respective items. In the second Results model, the correlation between the factors is constrained to 1.00. In each pair-wise comparison of factors, the constrained model resulted in a significantly higher χ2 value supporting For LISREL analysis, the raw data were aggregated at the discriminant validity. The threshold value for this Chi- departmental level which resulted in a sample of 43. The first square difference test (p < .05) is a χ2 of 3.84 with 1 degree part of the analysis was designed to test the psychometric of freedom. This test supported factor discrimination for all properties of the measures of SI and CP. The second part of factors. Overall, there is adequate support for discriminant the analysis was designed to test the three hypotheses. validity. DEPARTMENT CHAIRS AS LEADERS 57

Table 2 Means, Standard Deviations, Cronbach α and Indicator Reliabilities, Pearson Correlations, and Variance Inflation Factor

Variable M SD α IR 1 2 3 4 VIF 1. Situational awareness 3.66 .95 .93 .91 4.38 2. Situational response 3.51 1.07 .93 .95 .85 6.04 3. Cognitive empathy 3.17 .84 .90 .81 .69 .73 2.64 4. Social skills 3.49 1.21 .96 .92 .85 .89 .85 6.92 5. Creative performance 3.40 1.17 .97 .91 .84 .83 .71 .85 Note: N = 406. SA = Situational awareness, SR = Situational response, CE = Cognitive empathy, SS = Social skills, CP = Creative performance, IR = Indicator reliability (for IR, N = 43), VIF = Variance inflation factor. All the correlations are significant at p < .001 (two-tailed).

Univariate Normality. The samples exhibited a high path coefficients from social skills to situational awareness (β degree of univariate normality with skewness and kurtosis = .95) and from situational awareness to situational response statistics well within the acceptable levels of 1 and 7 for all (β = .99) were positive and significant, which provided full items (Curran, West, & Finch, 1996). Table 2 shows the support for Hypothesis 2. means, standard deviations, Cronbach α internal consistency Hypothesis 3 was concerned with the mediation effect of and indicator reliability coefficients, and variance inflation situational response on the relationship between situational factor (VIF) of the five study variables. The internal awareness and creative performance. As shown in Table 3, the consistency reliability coefficients of the five scales/subscales, two path coefficients from situational awareness to situational as assessed with Cronbach a, ranged between .90 and .97. response (β = .99) and from situational response to creative Overall, these coefficients are satisfactory (Nunnally, 1978). performance (β = .87) were positive and significant, which Each item has a reported R2 that measures the item’s provided full support for Hypothesis 3. variance explained by its factor. The R2s for all the items The fit indices for the full structural equations model ranged between .78 and .97. These reliabilities were judged (RMSEA = .09, RMSR = .03, χ2/df = 1.44, NFI = .96, CFI sufficient. The VIFs (ranged between 2.64-6.92) were < 10.00, = .99, IFI = .99), and GFI = .94) were satisfactory. Overall which indicate that multicollinearity was not a problem. these fit indices indicate that the model, indicated by the solid lines in Figure 1, fits well with the data. The RMSEA Structural Equations Model of .09 is greater than .07, which was probably caused by the Two LISREL models were computed to test the three sample size (N = 43) aggregated at the department level. hypotheses. The first model tested all the relationships in Figure 1 represented by the solid and broken lines. As Discussion expected, the links represented by the broken lines were not significant, but the remaining links represented by the solid The structural equations model for the study provided lines were all significant. In the second model only the links moderate to full support for the theoretical model presented represented by the solid lines were tested; the results are in Figure 1. Previous studies did not test the relationships of presented in Table 3. Results provided full support for the faculty perception of the department chair’s SI components three study hypotheses. to each other and to CP. This study contributes to our Hypothesis 1 refers to the mediation effect of social understanding of the linkage between situational awareness skills on the relationship between cognitive empathy and and situational response and between situational response situational awareness. As shown in Table 3, the two path and CP. It also contributes to our understanding of the coefficients from cognitive empathy to social skills (β = .86) relationships of cognitive empathy and social skills to and from social skills to situational awareness (β = .95) were situational awareness and situational response. It provides positive and significant, which provided full support for acceptable evidence of convergent and discriminant validities Hypothesis 1. and internal consistency and indicator reliabilities of the Hypothesis 2 was concerned with the mediation effect measures of SI and CP. The results support the construct of situational awareness on the relationship between social validity of the measure of SI as well as leaders’ CP (cf. skills and situational response. As shown in Table 3, the two Bagozzi, Yi, & Philips, 1991). 58 RAHIM, CIVELEK, AND LIANG

Table 3 Parameter Estimates for Structural Equations

Parameter path Statistic z–value CE → SS .86 5.65*** SS → SA .95 10.41*** SA → SR .99 12.08*** SR → CP .87 8.31***

Note: N = 43. These values are based on the causal model run on the covariance matrix. *** p < .001. (two-tailed)

Implications for Management and faculty members’ teaching and research performance, satisfaction, intent to leave a job, and organizational citizenship The study suggests that DCs would benefit from behavior. An important area of future research concerns improvements in terms of the four components of SI, to carefully designing and evaluating the effects of training in enhance their own CP. Interventions may be needed to SI in enhancing the aforementioned criterion variables. Field enhance their SI competencies that would involve education experiments are particularly useful in evaluating the effects of and specific job-related training (Cherniss & Adler, 2000; SI training on individual and organizational outcomes. There Goleman, 2005). DCs should also be encouraged to enhance is also need for scenario-based and laboratory studies that their abilities through continuous self-learning. Universities control some of the extraneous variables to better understand should provide positive reinforcements for learning and the effects of DCs’ SI. Moreover, a future study would be improving DCs’ essential SI competencies that are needed useful to investigate the differences in the perceptions for various academic disciplines. of faculty regarding the performance of various types of In the private sector, high performing organizations are academic leadership with low and high SI. now providing opportunities to managers for continuous learning that should help to improve their use of SI. Strengths and Limitations These organizations generally make appropriate changes in the organization design that involve creating flatter, One of the strengths of this study is that the measures of decentralized, and less complex structures. They are also endogenous and exogenous variables were analyzed at the making appropriate changes in organizational culture that department level, not individual level. This should help provides rewards for learning new competencies and for to overcome some of the problems of common method continuous questioning and inquiry. These changes in the variance (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). organization design, culture, and positive reinforcements Confirmatory factor analyses of the items indicated the should encourage managers to acquire SI competencies absence of common method variance. If common method needed for improving their own CP and subordinates’ job variance was present, the items of the independent and performance and satisfaction. Academic institutions can criterion measures will not significantly load on the five a learn from the changes that are taking place in the private priori factors. Limitations of this field study should be noted. sector for improving their effectiveness. Data were collected from one public university in the south Training and professional development are helpful to of the United States that might limit generalizability of the improve supervisors’ SI, but there is a limit to what it can results. do to acquire the four competencies of SI that may have a positive influence on DCs’ CP. Academic institutions may References have to adapt the policy of recruiting DCs with vision and charisma who are likely to be high on SI. Albrecht, K. (2007). Social intelligence: The new science of Directions for Future Research success. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Amabile, T. M., Barsade, S. G., Mueller, J. S., & Staw, B. M. Further research is needed to enhance our understanding of (2005). Affect and creativity at work. Administrative the relationships of SI to effectiveness of DCs’ leadership Science Quarterly, 50, 367-403. behaviors. Other criterion variables for future research should Ang, R. P., & Goh, D. H. (2010). Cyberbullying among include some indicators of DCs’ leadership effectiveness adolescents: The role of affective and cognitive empathy, DEPARTMENT CHAIRS AS LEADERS 59

and gender. Child Psychiatry: Human Development, 41, behavior: An interactional approach. Journal of Applied 387-397. Psychology, 86, 513−524. Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1996). Organizational learning-II. Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley. New York, NY: Bantum Books. Barczak, G., Lassk, F., & Mulki, J. (2010). Antecedents of Goleman, D. (2005). Social intelligence: The new science of team creativity: An examination of team emotional human relationships. New York, NY: Bantum Books. intelligence, team trust and collaborative culture. Isen, A. M. (1993). Positive affect and decision making. In Creativity and Innovation Management Journal, 19, M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland (Eds.), Handbook of emotions 332‒345. (pp. 261-277). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Baron, R. A. (2008). The role of affect in the entrepreneurial Isen, A. M. (2002). Missing in action in the AIM: Positive process. Academy of Management Review, 33, 328-340. affect’s facilitation of cognitive flexibility, innovation, Baron, R. A, & Ensley, M. D. (2006). Opportunity recognition and problem solving. Psychological Inquiry, 13, 57-65. as the detection of meaningful patterns: Evidence from Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1996a). LISREL 8: User’s comparisons of novice and experienced entrepreneurs. reference guide. Chicago, IL: Scien­tific Software Management Science, 52, 1331-1344. International. Baron, R. A., & Markham, G. D. (2000). Beyond social Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1996b). PRELIS 2: User’s capital: How social skills can enhance entrepreneurs’ reference guide. Chicago, IL: Scientific­ Software success. Academy of Management Executive, 14, 106-116. International. Baron, R. A., & Tang, J. (2009). Entrepreneurs’ social skills Kaukiainen, A., Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K., Osterman, K, and new venture performance: Mediating mechanisms Salmivalli, C., Rothberg, S., & Ahlbom, A. (1999). The and cultural generality. Journal of Management, 35, 282- relationships between social intelligence, empathy, and 306. three types of aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 25, 81-89. Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Philips, L. W. (1991). Assessing Kihlstrom, J. F., & Cantor, N. (2000). Social intelligence. In construct validity in organiza­tional research. R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (2nd ed., Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 421-458. pp. 359-379). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Bass, B. M. (2002). Cognitive, social, and emotional Press. intelligence. In R. E. Riggio, S. E. Murphy, & F. J. Lovelace, J. B., & Hunter, S. T. (2013). Charismatic, Pirozzolo (Eds.), Multiple and leadership (pp. ideological, and pragmatic leaders’ influence on 105-118). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. subordinate creative performance across the creative Bennis, W. G., & Thomas, R. J. (2002). Geeks and geezers. process. Creativity Research Journal, 25, 59‒74. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Byrne, C. L., Mumford, M. D., Barrett, J. D., & Vessey, W. B. Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2008). Emotional (2009). Examining the leaders of creative efforts: What intelligence: New ability or eclectic traits? American do they do, and what do they think about? Creativity and Psychologist, 63, 503-517. Innovation Management Journal, 18, 256‒268. Mayo, A. J., & Nohria, N. (2005). In their time: The greatest Castro, F. G., & Jorge de Sousa, F. D. (2012). Do intelligent business leaders at the twentieth century. Boston, MA: leaders make a difference? The effect of a leader’s Harvard Business School Press. emotional intelligence on followers’ creativity. Creativity Mitroff, I. I. (1998).Smart thinking for crazy times: The art and Innovation Management Journal, 21, 171‒182. of solving the right problems. San Francisco, CA: Berrett- Cherniss, C., & Adler, M. (2000). Promoting emotional Koehler. intelligence in organizations: Making training in emotional Mitroff, I. I., & Silvers, A. (2010). Dirty rotten strategies: How intelligence effective. Alexandria, VA: ASTD. we trick ourselves and others into solving the wrong problems Dewey, J. (1909). Moral principles in education. New York, precisely. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. NY: McGraw-Hill. Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity Ford, M. E., & Tisak, M. S. (1983). A further search for syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. social intelligence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, Psychological Bulletin, 103, 27-43. 197-206. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed. New York, NY: York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Basic Books. O’Brien, K. S., & O’Hare, D. (2007). Situational awareness George, J. M., & Zhou, J. (2001). When openness to ability and cognitive skills training in a complex real- experience and conscientiousness are related to creative world task. Ergonomics, 50, 1064-1091. 60 RAHIM, CIVELEK, AND LIANG

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, Sternberg, R. J. (2002). Successful intelligence: A new N. P. (2003). Common method bisases in behavioral approach to leadership. In R. E. Riggio, S. E. Murphy, & research: A critical review of the literature and F. J. Pirozzolo (Eds.), Multiple intelligences and leadership recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, (pp. 9-28). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 88, 879-903. Sternberg, R. J. (2009, Fall). Wisdom, intelligence, and Rahim, M. A. (2008, August). Social intelligence and creative creativity synthesized: A new model for liberal education. behavior. Paper presentated at the annual meeting of the Liberal Education, pp. 10-15. Academy of Management, Anaheim, CA. M. De Stobbeleir, K. E., Ashford, S. J., & Buyens, D. Rahim, M. (2014). A structural equations model of leaders’ (2011). Self-regulation of creativity at work: The role social intelligence and creative performance. Creativity of feedback-seeking behavior in creative performance. and Innovation Management, 23(1), 44-56. Academy of Management Journal, 54(4), 811-831. Rahim, M. A., & Bonoma, T. V. (1979). Managing Thorndike, R. L. (1920). Intelligence and its uses. Harper’s organizational conflict: A model for diagnosis and Magazine, 140, 227-235. intervention. Psychological Reports, 44, 1323-1344. van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Koh, C. K. S. (2009). Cultural Rego, A. S., Pina e Cunha, F., Correia, M., & Irina, A. S-A. intelligence: Measurement and scale development. (2007). Leader self-reported emotional intelligence and In M. A. Moodian (Ed.), Contemporary leadership and perceived employee creativity. Creativity and Innovation intercultural competence: Exploring the cross-cultural Management Journal, 18, 461‒473. dynamics within organizations (pp. 233-254). Thousand Rickards, T., & Moger, S. (2006). Creative leaders: A Oaks, CA: Sage. decade of contributions from Creativity and Innovation Vincent, A. S., Decker, B. P., & Mumford, M. D. (2002). Management Journal. Creativity and Innovation Divergent thinking, intelligence, and expertise: A test Management Journal, 15, 4‒18 of alternative models. Creativity Research Journal, 14(2), Schmidt, W. H., & Tannenbaum, R. (1960). Management 163-178. of differences. Harvard Business Review, 38(6), 107−115.